House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was trade.

Last in Parliament October 2015, as Conservative MP for South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale (B.C.)

Won his last election, in 2011, with 55% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Prison Farms December 2nd, 2010

Mr. Speaker, yesterday the Liberal public safety critic took some time away from debating Canada's fragile economic recovery to instead advocate for the rights of criminals. We could not disagree more with the misguided priorities of the Liberal Party.

While we share Canadians' focus on jobs and the economy, the Liberals focus on programs for prisoners. Less than 1% of the released offenders who participated in the program eventually found employment in a related sector, yet the member for Ajax—Pickering continually refers to the program as one of the most effective rehabilitation programs in the country.

One per cent may be good enough for the Liberal public safety critic, but not for us. It is time that the Liberal Party started paying some attention to jobs and the economy, the priorities of law-abiding Canadians.

International Aid November 25th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, Canada has a proud tradition of responding when natural disasters strike, providing immediate relief to those who are suffering.

We saw how quickly our government responded to the earthquake in Haiti. We saw the speed with which our government acted to ensure that our neighbours to the south had the basics. We know how important speed is when it comes to providing medical care, food, water and shelter.

Could the Minister of International Cooperation tell Canadians how we have improved our ability to respond when natural disasters occur?

Points of Order November 24th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, there are two aspects to the point of order that I have raised. One was in relation to the emails that the member has referenced, but he also referenced discussions that were held at an in camera meeting in his comments yesterday.

If he can explain how that information should be released to the public when it was divulged in an in camera meeting, perhaps he would have a leg to stand on, but at this point he does not.

Points of Order November 24th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order relating to the question of privilege that was raised yesterday after question period.

At that time the member for Mississauga South stood and spoke at length about his concern that members' privileges were breached in the release of a confidential report.

However, in the course of his comments on confidentiality in this place, he breached the very same privileges that he was complaining about. He did so by quoting from emails that were only released at an in camera meeting and therefore in confidence and by divulging the nature of discussions at that very meeting.

The member himself acknowledged that he may be breaching confidential information in his statement yesterday and I would submit that he was in fact doing so.

The member is very experienced in parliamentary procedure and therefore this was most likely an inadvertent mistake on his part. However, he himself should appreciate the seriousness of revealing in camera matters even while commenting on a possible breach of privilege.

I therefore invite the member for Mississauga South to apologize for this breach of the rules of this place.

Pensions November 23rd, 2010

Mr. Chair, I have to say that I am astonished that the member would have the nerve to stand up six times in the course of one evening and ask the exact same question when he very well knows that, as far as we can tell, there is no substance to this question. As he knows, the parliamentary secretary has already committed to find an answer to this question.

Perhaps the member is at a loss on the subject matter to ask any additional questions, but to raise the same question six times, I think, is going a little too far.

Pensions November 23rd, 2010

Mr. Chair, it is an honour to serve with the member on the finance committee. He is one of the shining lights on that committee, as is the parliamentary secretary.

The member raises a good point. He has listed the things that our government has done as accomplishments. I listed some of those as well.

It is important for Canadians to recognize that when it comes to consultation, we are setting a higher standard than perhaps any previous government has done in terms of inviting Canadians to provide us their input, whether it is on pension reform or prebudget consultations on the next budget.

We are listening to Canadians in a way that I do not think has ever been done in this place. I am proud of the fact that our government is setting such a high standard in this regard.

Pensions November 23rd, 2010

Mr. Chair, it is an honour to serve with the member for Hamilton East—Stoney Creek on another committee.

With respect to his question, it is important to note that this government has taken 950,000 Canadians off the tax rolls. The average family in Canada saves more than $3,000 a year, thanks to the tax cuts of our government. We have cut over 100 taxes in every way that the government collects taxes, whether it be personal taxes, consumption taxes, business taxes, excise taxes and more.

Regarding the tax free saving account, the Minister of Finance was before our committee today and noted that more than four million Canadians had taken the step of saving in this fashion.

I want to note what Peter Aceto, chief executive officer of ING Direct, said with respect to the TFSAs. He said, “We think the tax free savings accounts are a great gift the government has given to Canadians to help them save. It is the most important thing that has happened in that regard since RSPs were introduced 50 years ago”.

Pensions November 23rd, 2010

Mr. Chair, my colleague from York West has raised a number of questions and I will do my best to answer as many of them as I can.

She started with pensions that are regulated provincially. It is important to recognize that we are very concerned about these individuals, but we also have to recognize the limits of our jurisdiction. As has been mentioned many times this evening during the question and answer period, we are working with the Province of Ontario to address the concerns she has raised, but we have to recognize that a court has made certain decisions and that the provinces ultimately have the prerogative to decide how they will address this. We will be working with them in whatever way we can to facilitate that.

She also raised the question about mandatory retirement age. That is a very interesting question. I think many Canadians, although they do not want to be told when to retire, would like to have the option of deciding for themselves when they would like to retire. I know from an earlier conversation with the Minister of Labour that she is in fact consulting Canadians on this issue at the present time.

Pensions November 23rd, 2010

Mr. Chair, I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak in the debate on pension and retirement income issues and to speak to what our Conservative government has accomplished in this important area in recent years.

My riding of South Surrey—White Rock—Cloverdale has one of the highest concentrations of retired Canadians of any community in the nation. Therefore, I am particularly pleased to participate in this debate which is focused on improvements to Canada's retirement income system, including the ongoing dialogue between federal, provincial and territorial governments and consultations with all Canadians.

Let me start by stating that our government shares the deep-rooted concerns of many Canadians about their retirement security. We understand the importance of a secure and dignified retirement, especially after a lifetime spent building a better Canada through hard work.

For that reason we have been aggressively focused on working to improve our retirement income system. Indeed, we have already taken major action to strengthen Canada's retirement income system.

What have we done? In recognition of their lifelong contributions to our country and our government's core belief that Canadians should keep more of their hard-earned money, we dramatically lowered the federal tax bill for seniors and pensioners.

Since forming government in 2006, our enviable record includes more than $2 billion in annual targeted tax relief, such as: an increase to the age credit amount by $2,000; doubling the amount of income eligible for the pension income credit; increasing the age limit to 71 for maturing pensions and registered retirement savings plans; introducing the tax free savings account, which is particularly beneficial to seniors as it helps them meet their ongoing savings needs on a tax efficient basis after they are no longer eligible to contribute to an RRSP.

Jonathan Chevreau, a noted financial commentator, has declared the TFSA is “a welcome tax shelter for Canadian seniors”.

Another thing we have done is we have provided pension income splitting since 2007 and subsequent taxation years. Jamie Golombek, managing director of tax and estate planning at CIBC and a financial commentator has noted, “pension splitting is probably one of the biggest tax changes in decades, in terms of the amount of tax savings this can mean for pensioners”.

What is more, our record also includes important improvements to several specific retirement income supports, such as dramatically increasing the amount working seniors can earn before facing a clawback under their guaranteed income supplement, allowing them to keep more of their hard-earned money. As well, we have increased the flexibility for seniors and older workers with federally regulated pension assets that are held in life income funds.

What else have we done? We have taken major steps to reform the legislative and regulatory framework respecting federally regulated private pension plans. Indeed, this represented the most significant reforms in nearly 25 years.

Announced in October 2009 after extensive cross-country and online public consultations held in the months beforehand, the reforms included: enhancing protections for plan members; allowing sponsors to better manage their funding obligations; making it easier for participants to negotiate changes to their pension arrangements; improving the framework for defined contribution and negotiated contribution plans; and modernizing the investment rules.

These key reforms were warmly applauded across Canada. A diverse and broad group of public interest groups ranging from the National Association of Federal Retirees, the Association of Canadian Pension Management, the Canadian Institute of Actuaries, CARP, Canada's Association for the Fifty-Plus, the Common Front for Retirement Security, the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association, and even the Canadian Labour Congress all welcomed and expressed their pleasure with these changes.

A Globe and Mail editorial heralded the reforms as a “good step”.

Even John Manley, former Liberal member of Parliament, finance minister and deputy prime minister, declared them to be “significant reforms that will enhance protection for plan members”.

However, those reforms to federally regulated private pension plans were only one step in a much larger process.

That leads to the final area where we have made some improvements. We are focused on improving retirement security and pensions in Canada by working with our provincial and territorial partners.

While many Canadians may not realize it, the vast majority of pensions are regulated by the province. Only 10% are regulated federally. In other words, the federal government only has the constitutional authority to make laws related to the private pension plans of federally regulated workers, such as those who work for the airlines, chartered banks and so on, which employ less than one in ten workers in Canada.

That is why to address larger pan-Canadian concerns about pensions, we have been examining the relevant issues with our provincial and territorial counterparts in a co-operative and constructive manner, not by imposing unilateral or fragmented solutions as some would have suggested even here tonight.

In the words of Ontario Liberal finance minister Dwight Duncan, “Our preference is a pan-Canadian solution as opposed to each province on its own”. We have demonstrated this recently by establishing a joint research working group on retirement income adequacy, and by holding numerous federal-provincial-territorial summits on this issue.

We also believe that the Canadian public has a fundamental right to be involved in and at the centre of this debate. That is why we have ensured that Canadians from coast to coast to coast have had the opportunity to have their voices heard in person and online. From March to May 2010, we invited public input through round table discussions, expert conferences, online consultations and public town hall meetings to gather feedback directly from Canadians.

Even labour organizations, such as CUPE, typically not supporters of our government, have been forced to begrudgingly admit that we have conducted “a serious public policy discussion”.

Following these extensive and necessary consultations, the findings strongly suggested that we explore opportunities to build further on the strengths of Canada's retirement income system. As a result, we agreed, along with the provincial and territorial governments, to explore a set of innovative improvements. While no final decisions have been made at this point, options are under study and development for further review when federal, provincial and territorial finance ministers meet again at the end of 2010.

Clearly, our Conservative government is taking a leadership role in addressing the concerns surrounding retirement income adequacy. However, as with many issues, there is always more that could be done.

As a member of the Commons finance committee, I have had the opportunity to hear a great deal from experts on the issue of retirement savings in recent months. We have been given countless suggestions, but I would like to focus on a few that will not cost our government much, if anything, but may improve the long-term prospects for many future retirees.

First, we can work toward making RRSP contribution limits fairer for Canadians without pension plans. The incomes of non-salaried Canadians vary widely from year to year, and the self-employed and small business employees are often challenged to achieve the same savings as those with employer-contributed pension plans.

One solution may be to base RRSP contribution limits on an average income, allowing the carry forward or back of earned income above the annual limit to maximize RRSP contributions.

Another solution may be to adopt a lifetime savings limit, so that workers can obtain the necessary retirement savings at any point in their lifetime.

Another approach to helping those without an employer-provided pension could be to allow for the creation of pooled pension plans. Delinking employment from pension plans and allowing workers to participate in pooled pension arrangements would allow many Canadians to access greater retirement security at no cost to taxpayers.

We had a couple of suggestions regarding lost RRSP contribution room, which impacts the ability of Canadians to maximize the full benefit of RRSPs. RRSP contribution room is lost when workers make withdrawals due to financial hardship, a lost job or other circumstances during their working lives. Restoring that RRSP contribution room when withdrawals are made would allow workers to replace their retirement savings once their personal crisis was past, and ensure that the funds would be there for their golden years.

RRSP contribution room is also lost when those who do not contribute to RRSPs early in life lose the value of their contribution room through inflation. This probably applies to most Canadians, as mortgages and children tend to be major expenses earlier in their earning years as workers, and their RRSP contributions are often delayed.

By indexing their unused RRSP contribution room to inflation, we could introduce additional fairness for these Canadians.

Another suggestion we heard concerned allowing Canadians greater diversity in the choice of their registered foreign investments. More diverse investment opportunities spread and reduce investment risk and could lead to greater returns for investors.

However, the number of stock exchanges where Canadians can invest retirement savings is currently limited. Currently, foreign stock exchanges must apply to be listed to sell securities to Canadians. Expanding the list of stock exchanges worldwide would increase the diversity of Canadians' investment portfolios.

Democratic Reform November 18th, 2010

Mr. Speaker, in the course of his tirade yesterday, the NDP leader bemoaned the length of terms in the Senate. He told Canadians that they should worry because senators are appointed for “one heck of a long time”. We understand those were hollow words when he directed his procedural henchmen to plot a strategy to kill our Conservative government's Senate term limits bill, a bill that would solve the problem he claimed to be worried about. As the member for Hamilton Centre admitted, it was done as a retaliation.

Canadians expect better. Unlike the NDP leader who tells Canadians one thing and does something else in the House of Commons, Conservatives have been consistent and clear since 2006. We support reforming the upper house, including limiting senators to a single term of eight years.